Buddy Roemer, the twice-divorced ex-Louisiana governor who’s eying a Republicans presidential bid, earlier this week declared his opposition to marriage — but maintained that it’s a state’s rights issue, so if certain states want to legalize it, so be it. As long as it’s not his. Now he’s angry you misinterpreted his words!
“I’m a traditionalist in marriage,” he told the Huffington Post on Tuesday. “Here’s as far as I can go: I’m comfortable with the states having this discussion. And I’m all for — in my extended family, not my wife or kids, but beyond — cousins, that sort of thing — we have a gay member. We honor him. He’s a great guy. He moved to California so he would be in a community where he would be more comfortable. And I love living in a country where gays are honored and esteemed, but traditional lives can continue as well. … [If] I was living in the state or was part of the debate, I would oppose it, I want to make that clear. But that’s why we have 50 states. They’re all a little bit different.”
But now he’s hitting back at HuffPo, claiming his comments were misrepresenting. Except they weren’t! In a follow up email, Roemer declares, “The issue of gay marriage is one on which I am clear. As I said in the interview, I am a traditionalist on this issue as is my Methodist Church. A marriage is between a man and a woman. Gays will not be slandered by me or my church, but gay marriage is not an option. The Defense of Marriage Act, with which I agree, prohibits the Federal Government from recognizing any marriage not between a man and a woman. Each state has the right to set these boundaries within its state, and I would stand with the traditionalists in my state and prohibit gay marriage.”
If you’re confused as to how Roemer’s new statements clarify his previous ones, you have a right to be. Because they don’t! He’s saying the same thing both times.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
• He supports DOMA and the federal blind eye to any state’s legal same-sex marriage
• He’s personally against same-sex marriage
• He believes same-sex marriage is a state rights issue, and would leave it up to states to decide the matter for themselves
• If he lived in a state with legal same-sex marriage, he’d be opposed to it
All of those pieces are, in fact, logically sound and can be believed by the same person at once. It’s an argument we hear all the time! But lucky for us, we don’t have to do much parsing of Roemer’s beliefs on gay marriage, because there’s only one that matters: he doesn’t want you to have them. Roemer, you see, may think he believes in states’ rights, but what he believes in is marriage discrimination.
EdWoody
“I love living in a country where gays are honored and esteemed, but traditional lives can continue as well. … ”
Why can these people not grasp the exceedingly simple logic that granting gay people marriage rights has no effect whatsoever on the “traditional lives” he holds so dear? The two things are completely separate. Have your traditional life, that’s fine, we don’t care. Just do us the same.
Harbo
This man’s thinking is still Victorian. Every word he says is bigoted. And letting the states vote on same-sex marriage will never work. If states had been to decide the integraton issue, black children would still be going to “separate-but-equal” schools. The courts will have mandate it.
Arthur
Hypocritical especially since when he was governor he had a long-term relationship with his state police security chief. Yep Buddy’s a Mo. Troopers name was Mixon if memory serves me.